Slashdot Mirror


Daily Pot Use Tied To Age of First Psychotic Episode

An anonymous reader writes "Reuters reports, 'In a study of adults who experienced psychosis for the first time, having smoked marijuana daily was linked to an earlier age of onset of the disorder.' ..."This is not a study about the association between cannabis and psychosis, but about the association between specific patterns of cannabis use ... and an earlier onset of psychotic disorders,' Dr. Marta Di Forti, who led the research at the Institute of Psychiatry at Kings College, said in an email. Among more than 400 people in South London admitted to hospitals with a diagnosed psychotic episode, the study team found the heaviest smokers of high-potency cannabis averaged about six years younger than patients who had not been smoking pot. Psychosis is a general term for a loss of reality, and is associated with several psychiatric diseases, including schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. ... "The thorny question is whether they might otherwise have developed the disease or would have not had mental illness. It's a distinction we haven't figured out yet," Compton said. ... It is still unclear whether there are safe levels of use for cannabis, she added. '"

11 of 382 comments (clear)

  1. Cause and effect may be backwards by TheRealMindChild · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps these folks were smoking that much pot as a coping means ("self medicating") because of their troubles, rather than pot causing the troubles

    --

    "When life gives you lemons, don't make lemonade. Make life take the lemons back!" -- Cave Johnson
    1. Re:Cause and effect may be backwards by dyingtolive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I'm afraid that doesn't fit the narrative.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    2. Re:Cause and effect may be backwards by king+neckbeard · · Score: 3, Insightful

      How do you figure that? I'm pretty sure that these conditions exist in some state prior to one's first episode. There's also the fact that this particular pattern might select itself for certain demographics more than others, and the environment they are in might contain factors that do influence this.

      --
      This is my signature. There are many like it, but this one is mine.
    3. Re:Cause and effect may be backwards by TsuruchiBrian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not necessarily. It could be that marijuana increase schizophrenia, and some other factor decreases schizophrenia fore than marijuana increases it. I'm not saying this is the case, but you can't just look at a period where schizophrenia decreased and say that everything that increased in that time period can't be increasing schizophrenia.

    4. Re:Cause and effect may be backwards by Curtman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You do not understand what the person you replied to is saying.

      I do. I'm only suggesting that if marijuana use increases 1000% and there is no epidemic of schizophrenia afterward, there doesn't seem to be any reason to assume a causal link, or to fear one..

      There may be underlying factors influencing the decrease in schizophrenia, but there is absolutely no evidence that using cannabis will increase your likelihood of being diagnosed with it.

  2. This just in... by wiredlogic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    People with addictive personalities more prone to mental problems. Who'd have thunk?

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    1. Re:This just in... by sg_oneill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People with addictive personalities more prone to mental problems. Who'd have thunk?

      Or , ya know, you could actually read the article. Its not about how prone someone is, its when the symptoms start. Schizophrenia shows early symptoms in childhood, and if you've got it, you will succumb to psychosis eventually. Whats happening here is the pot smokers are succumbing earlier. This wont affect most people, but those who are succeptible, perhaps pots a bad idea. The trick scientifically is identifying those in danger.

      --
      Excuse the Unicode crap in my posts. That's an apostrophe, and slashdot is busted.
  3. in the context of society.. by gl4ss · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ..there probably isn't a "safe use level".

    however, and here is the big thing, the thing to test against should be daily alcohol use of comparable amount - or if possible, test against whichever it is the people choose if they have both options available.

    though, I'd reckon that if you're likely to have psychosis of some sort you're already more likely to be choosing to be a fucking _daily_ pot smoker for 20 years - if you get little crazy from being high 20 years that's not even news - but that is not the point, you go pretty fucked just from drinking 8 beers a day for 20 years too...

    --
    world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  4. Reefer madness? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's strange timing that this study is being released around the time Colorado has fully legalized pot, Washington is well on their way to doing so, and you can get "medical marijuana" in other states.

    I'm not sure what the motivation is. Personally, I don't see a very good future for the middle class (automation of pretty much every job is coming,) so it would seem that it would be in everyone's best interest to keep most of the unemployed population stoned every day to reduce petty crime. I guess I'm just a pessimist though.

    The whole war on drugs thing just needs to be dropped. Let everyone have whatever they want and plow the money you were putting into police and prisons into treatment programs for people who voluntarily want to stop.

    CAPTCHA: syringe. Holy coincidence!

    1. Re:Reefer madness? by fustakrakich · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The whole war on drugs thing just needs to be dropped.

      Why do you want to kill a golden goose? Join the dark side of prohibition and make billions.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:Reefer madness? by ultranova · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, capitalism is unfair. Sadly, all other economic systems -- when implemented in large scale, and in the real world -- are even less fair. Otherwise, the Soviet Union would have survived while the US collapsed.

      So maximum fairness is the same as maximum efficiency, the only difference between SU and US was the economic system, and there are only two possible economic systems?

      Nice logic.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.